Borough Prop. 1 buried by landslide of ‘no’ votes

By Russell Stigall
For the Frontiersman
Published on Tuesday, October 2, 2007 11:54 PM AKDT

MAT-SU — It wasn’t even close.

Tuesday’s Mat-Su Borough election resulted in a sound defeat for Prop. 1, a controversial land-use measure that sparked vocal and heated debate in the weeks leading up to Election Day. Mat-Su Taxpayers Against Prop. 1 called the results a victory for public planning as Borough voters turned down the Private Property Protection Act by a margin of 4,585 votes. Of the 10,846 who cast ballots Tuesday, 7,658 — 70.6 percent — were against Prop. 1. Overall, 3,073 were in favor of the measure.

Titled the Private Property Protection Act, Prop.1 was sponsored by locals Penny Nixon and Dennis Oakland of the Mat-Su Taxpayers Association. Prop. 1 was written as an effort to halt the Mat-Su Borough passing “extreme” land use regulations by making the Borough pay landowners for any reduction in property valuation resulting from its actions, Oakland said.

GREG JOHNSON/Frontiersman With hours left before the 8 p.m. close of local polling places, campaigners for Mat-Su Borough Prop. 1 were out in force. At the corner of Palmer-Wasilla Highway and Seward Meridian Parkway Prop. 1 opponents Sue Ely, right, and Darin Markwardt wave to motorists. Across the highway, Prop. 1 supporters smile and hold a large sign. Although on opposing sides of a political issue, both campaign camps earlier in the day helped push a stranded motorist out of the intersection.

In addition to Mat-Su Taxpayers Against Prop.1, Cook Inlet Region Inc., the Mat-Su Home Builders Association and Mat-Su Valley Board of Realtors also campaigned against the question. The groups say Prop. 1 was poorly written, vague and opened the Borough and municipalities up to costly lawsuits and monetary claims.

Nixon, a co-sponsor of Prop. 1 and the Mat-Su Borough Tax Cap, said he writes initiatives, but it is up to the voters to pass them.

“It is up the public,” he said. “You can’t drag them out. If they don’t vote, they get what they’re given.”

Nixon commented on the decisive margin against his proposition.

“I’ll be the first to declare [Tuesday’s result] a stunning victory for socialism,” Nixon said.

Nixon said he and other proponents of Prop. 1 raised about $11,000 during their campaign. The proposition was designed to put a decisive choice in front of the voters.

“Defend the Constitution and your human rights or let the Borough dictate how you should live,” Nixon said.

Nixon said he is going to take a wait-and-see approach to any future propositions he may sponsor.

“It is way to early to think about that sort of thing,” Nixon said. “I’m a strategic thinker. I don’t worry about the immediate effects. In the long run, if the Borough harms property owners they will come out and take care of it on their own.”

Kevin Brown, spokesperson Mat-Su Taxpayers Against Prop. 1, didn’t hold back when he announced the outcome of the vote.

“It is most assuredly a victory,” Brown said. “Now, first of all, we celebrate. But tomorrow the real work starts.”

The campaign against Prop. 1 was just the beginning, Brown said.

“It was about stopping a bad law so we can put good laws in its place,” he said. “We have a strong coalition and we plan to move forward in a positive way.”

The anti-Prop. 1 group was comprised of varied groups, Brown said. “It was a cross-section of society. When environmentalist and developers are on the same side you know there is an important issue there.”

Brown said Prop. 1 lost because it had support of a small number of very vocal proponents, but most voters saw Prop. 1 for what it was — bad legislation.

“Our job was simply to inform the voters,” Brown said. “When we had that conversation with the voters they showed they wanted to understand this, they wanted to know everything.”

Part of the anti-Prop. 1 campaign was to hand out copies of the initiative, Brown said, adding he was surprised that after handing out thousands of copies, so many voters would take the time to read through six pages of legal text.

“The voters here are unlike voters anywhere I’ve seen,” he said.

Comments

12 comment(s)

    Hello from DC wrote on Oct 7, 2007 7:11 PM:

    " We, deep pocket big money environmental groups, thank you sheep in the Mat-Su for allowing us to dump tons of cash into you local election. Now we know the proponents of Prop 1 had more Mat-Su financial support, but thanks to our help from Seattle and Washington DC, we were able to QUASH this rebellion against the new order of things. Thank you.. we have only just begun.. "

    Power to the people! wrote on Oct 7, 2007 6:49 PM:

    " Hail Marx, we won!! No more freedom for these right wing fools! We must banish freedom from the face of the earth!! Freedom is what destroys our environment and natural surroundings! We will finally stop all of these evil subdivisions and end the exploitative killing of our resources. All hail Ceasar! "

    James wrote on Oct 7, 2007 1:04 AM:

    " All you need to say is that property owners will pay more TAXES if this bill goes through, and it will get shot down IMMEDIATELY. Just like it did. Anything that has to do with TAXES is not popular with anyone who is already paying outrageous property TAX. Just like all of us who have to pay the HIGH cost of PROPERTY TAX. Absolutely no one in their RIGHT MIND WILL GO FOR THIS. We don't need any more TAXES ON TOP OF OUR TAXES ENOUGH SAID. FLUSH PROP 1 DOWN THE TOILET ALONG WITH THE PEOPLE WHO WERE 4IT. "

    Concerned resident wrote on Oct 6, 2007 10:56 PM:

    " Proposition 1 was a big lie that would have devastated the Valley's quality of life. It was taken word for word from Oregon's fiasco, Measure 37, and backed by a NYC multi-millionaire crook real estate developer named Howie Rich who has pushed these propositions all over the United States. Prop. 1's defeat was a victory for the Valley and a blow to Rich. Penny Nixon is a fool. Prop. 1 needed defeat, and it got what it deserved. It is a good day for democracy, justice, and freedom. Power to the people! "

    Bill O wrote on Oct 6, 2007 7:13 PM:

    " I was born in Alaska in 1954 I remember when we could buy land and do what we wanted on it. I left for 20 years and lived in oregon I finally got fed up with the local government telling me how big my house could be or having to buy permits to put in a new closet or just plant a tree in my yard. If you let local government get to much power over land use you will soon have no use of land . "

    Kari Sleight wrote on Oct 5, 2007 10:04 AM:

    " The Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman first came out in opposition to Prop 1 in a July 10 editorial. The opinions expressed in our editorials and the news stories we cover are not influenced by advertising purchases. Kari Sleight Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman Publisher "

    Huh? wrote on Oct 5, 2007 9:43 AM:

    " Why does every Prop 1 supporter seem to believe that voting against Prop 1 makes you a socialist liberal? You all need a serious Political Science and American History lesson. I am sorry that our education system has failed you so miserably that you would make such a ludicrous statement. Prop 1 failed. How about you stop whining about it, blaming others for your problems, and take some responsibility by spending your time working on a better plan that the entire community can support? "

    jim summers wrote on Oct 4, 2007 6:02 PM:

    " my wife & I are out-of-state for a few wks visiting family. We just ck'ed to see how the elections came out.We are overjoyed at the outcome. School Board chg's are long overdue & the defeat of Prop 1 makes us real happy, as well. Seems like most Mat-Su voters are thinking & feeling just like we were. Thnx Frontiersman for having a great web page for us to keep up with Valley news while traveling. "

    TonyS wrote on Oct 4, 2007 2:41 AM:

    " Bad laws are often fixed quickly when they become a burden to the Government. When there are no Laws controlling Government, individual citizens tend to get run over. This law (albiet poorly conceived and written)would have offered some security from Government management/mismanagement of land use and restrictions to property owners, myself included. I hope you socialist sheep stop voteing with the crowd and start thinking through to what you end up with when you vote against your own best interests. "

    Re: ?uestion wrote on Oct 3, 2007 7:34 PM:

    " The Frontiersman is a little ADN wanna-be. They came out in opposition after checking what their big bro's position was going to be. "

    ?uestion wrote on Oct 3, 2007 2:13 PM:

    " Now that it's all said and done, just wondering why the Frontiersman came out in opposition to this issue. I thought it was a bit of a coincidence that the paper ran an editorial in opposition to Prop. 1 on the same day a full-page ad appeared from the Valley Realtors. Here's the question: Is it possible to buy space on the editorial page directly, or do you have to go through the pretense of purchasing an advertisement? "

    Good Job Penny wrote on Oct 3, 2007 11:54 AM:

    " Penny, you were on the right track in wanting to help this community. You felt Prop 1 was good and stood by it. That can be respected, but to be quoted as saying "stunning victory for socialism". What kind of poor sportsmanship is that? The voters clearly indicated that they disagreed with Prop 1. Not you. Not the intent. Not your desire to help the community. Not “your kind”. Just Prop 1. That doesn't make them socialists. It makes them Americans. They stood up for they believed in and said “we want better”. "

WRITE A COMMENT

Use the form below to post a brief comment to this story, or respond to other readers. Please use the word count tool to assist you in keeping your remarks to 100 words or fewer.

Comments must be approved by an editor before appearing on the Web site. Editors review submitted comments periodically during the day for offensive or off-topic content before posting. Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

(optional)
Current Word Count:
   




Classifieds




Make Us Your Homepage